I just got the word that GBCI has reversed their position regarding mercury content in flyash. They previously formally stated that ALL flyash in a project had to meet minimum mercury requirements in order to get ANY points under MRc3. They've now realized how much of a credit-killer this is and have reversed their opinion. They haven't created a CIR (yet) but wrote the following:
"We have not moved forward with publishing an addenda or any other official clarification on this issue, but I have touched base with other HC reviewers and we are definitely all approaching the same way at this point—the dollar value of any SCMs derived from coal-power plants can simply be omitted from the credit if the project cannot document a mercury content of
Susan Walter
HDRLEEDuser Expert
1296 thumbs up
October 3, 2014 - 4:17 pm
Hooray! Thanks for the information and thank Gail for me.
Susan
Marc Mondor
PrincipalEvolve LLC
59 thumbs up
January 20, 2016 - 12:06 pm
Has there been any update on this? We are having trouble getting further information on the mercury content of our fly ash - the documentation currently says "trace amounts of mercury" which I don't think is specific enough. So what this says is that we could just omit the dollar value of the fly ash and still earn credit for the rest of the concrete for regional materials? This is our first healthcare project and I'm hoping for some official guidance to cite.
Thanks!
Susan Walter
HDRLEEDuser Expert
1296 thumbs up
January 20, 2016 - 12:38 pm
Marc,
I thought that the GBCI has issued this formally in an Addenda but could not quickly find that information from you. I would proceed following Mara's post above and simply eliminate the value of the fly ash from the credit calculations. Personally, I would not 'pre-narrate' the approach but would wait for a review comment to respond. This should be documenation the contractor fills out.
If you are the architect, then you don't need to change the specification regarding fly ash.
S.
Mara Baum
Partner, Architecture & SustainabilityDIALOG
674 thumbs up
January 20, 2016 - 12:44 pm
There hasn't to my knowledge been a CIR published, and I don't think one is anticipated - but we receveid fairly specific direction on this, so if you get push back from your reviewer and my quote above isn't sufficient, then please email me privately and I'll forward what I have. (That quote is a direct email from a lead GBCI LEED HC reviewer.) I think Susan's approach is correct - proceed with the calculations without the flyash value; no narrative needed.